The BLUE PRESS JOURNAL

We aim to be a voice in the ongoing political discourse, providing both factual information and opinionated analysis, from a progressive or center-left perspective, free from the direct influence of major
established Main Street Media.

  • Tulsi Gabbard’s Baseless Claims Boost Trump’s Russia Denials

    In a shocking display of loyalty to her boss, President Donald Trump, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard has come under fire for perpetuating the president’s long-debunked claims about Russian interference in the 2016 election. On Friday, Gabbard called for the Obama administration to be “prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law” for allegedly manufacturing intelligence to support the claim that Russia interfered in the election to boost Trump’s campaign.

    This statement is a blatant attempt to rewrite history and erase the findings of multiple investigations over the past eight years. The 2017 Intelligence Community Assessment, published during Trump’s first term, concluded that Russia did indeed meddle in the election with the specific goal of helping Trump win. The assessment was based on evidence gathered by the intelligence community, including the CIA, FBI, and NSA.

    Gabbard’s claims have been met with swift criticism from lawmakers, including Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Intelligence Committee. Warner pointed out that the Senate Intel Committee had already unanimously concluded that Russia interfered in the 2016 election. “If there had been some Obama conspiracy, we would have found it,” Warner said in a statement. “This latest lie is another sad, dangerous example of Tulsi Gabbard trying to rewrite history and erode trust in the [intelligence community].”

    Gabbard’s possible sympathies with Russia have raised eyebrows in the past. During her confirmation hearings, lawmakers questioned her about her defense of Russia’s 2020 invasion of Ukraine. Former aides also alleged that she regularly consumed media from RT, the Kremlin’s propaganda outlet. These concerns have led many to wonder whether Gabbard is truly committed to serving the interests of the United States or if she is instead working to advance a pro-Russia agenda.

  • TRUMP’S EPSTEIN DISTRACTION BLITZ: PRESIDENT ATTEMPTS TO DIVERT ATTENTION FROM GROWING CONTROVERSY

    In a calculated move, President Donald Trump has launched a desperate bid to distract his loyal base from the escalating controversy surrounding the unreleased Jeffrey Epstein files. Instead of addressing the growing demands from his supporters to release federal records related to his onetime close friend, the late convicted sex offender, Trump has resorted to flooding his social media platform with “shiny objects” designed to divert attention.

    Over the weekend, Trump’s Truth Social account was filled with a barrage of posts that seemed to be intentionally crafted to deflect scrutiny from the Epstein controversy. The posts ranged from rants about NFL team name changes to scathing attacks on Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). One of the most bizarre posts featured an unhinged AI-generated video showing former President Barack Obama being arrested in the Oval Office, leaving many to wonder about the President’s mental state.

    The Epstein controversy has been gaining momentum in recent weeks, with many of Trump’s supporters calling on him to release federal records related to the case. However, instead of providing transparency and accountability, Trump has chosen to employ his signature distraction tactics. By flooding the zone with provocative and attention-grabbing posts, the President hopes to shift the focus away from his own ties to Epstein and the allegations of wrongdoing that have plagued his administration.

    Critics argue that Trump’s distraction blitz is a clear indication of his guilt and desperation to avoid accountability. “The President’s refusal to release the Epstein files and his attempts to distract the public with ridiculous posts on social media are a slap in the face to the American people,” said Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.). “It’s time for Trump to come clean and provide the transparency that the public deserves.”

  • Economic Woes Mount for Trump as Polls Show Disapproval on Handling of Economy: 60% +

    A new CBS News/YouGov poll has delivered a significant blow to President Donald Trump’s economic agenda, revealing that a majority of Americans believe the economy is deteriorating under his administration. The poll found that 55% of Americans think the economy is getting worse, while 60% disapprove of Trump’s handling of economic issues.

    The news comes as inflation in the US continues to rise, with the Consumer Price Index (CPI) showing a 2.7% increase in June, up from 2.4% in May. Core inflation, which excludes food and energy, also rose to 2.9%, up from 2.8% the previous month. The escalating inflation is attributed, in part, to the effects of Trump’s tariffs, which have led businesses to increase costs on consumers.

    The poll also highlights the widespread perception that Trump’s policies are exacerbating the financial burden on Americans. A staggering 62% of respondents believe that Trump’s policies are driving up the cost of groceries, while 50% say they have become financially worse off under his administration.

    Furthermore, the poll reveals significant opposition to Trump’s trade policies, with 60% of Americans opposing the imposition of new tariffs on imported goods. The tariffs, which were introduced as part of Trump’s “America First” agenda, have been widely criticized for sparking trade wars and increasing costs for consumers.

    The findings are a far cry from Trump’s campaign promises, in which he vowed to lower prices and stimulate economic growth. Instead, the data suggests that his policies have had the opposite effect, with many Americans feeling the pinch of rising costs and stagnant wages.

  • Trump’s Deportation and Detention Policies Spark Widespread Disapproval

    A recent surge in disapproval of President Trump’s handling of immigration has left his administration reeling, with a majority of Americans expressing dissatisfaction with his aggressive and inhumane policies. According to a CBS News/YouGov poll conducted between July 16 and July 18, 56% of U.S. adults disapprove of Trump’s approach to immigration, a significant increase from 46% in March.

    The findings are corroborated by a CNN/SSRS poll conducted between July 10 and July 13, which found that 58% of U.S. adults disapprove of Trump’s handling of immigration. The growing discontent with the President’s policies has been fueled by reports of deplorable conditions at immigration detention sites, as well as the increasingly brutal tactics employed by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents.

    The ICE raids, which have become a hallmark of the Trump administration’s immigration policy, have been widely criticized for their aggressive nature. Agents have been known to ambush immigrants at their homes and workplaces, sparking fear and anxiety among communities across the country. The detention sites, meanwhile, have been plagued by allegations of overcrowding, poor sanitation, and inadequate access to basic necessities like food and water.

    The backlash against Trump’s immigration policies has been swift and merciless, with many critics accusing the administration of prioritizing politics over people. By backing such inhumane and aggressive policies, Trump has managed to turn one of his strongest issues into a major vulnerability, leaving his administration scrambling to regain public trust.

  • TRUMP’S MOVE TO UNSEAL EPSTEIN TRANSCRIPTS SEEN AS STALL TACTIC

    In a move widely viewed as an attempt to divert attention from his own potential involvement, President Trump has requested the unsealing of grand jury transcripts in the prosecution of Jeffrey Epstein, the late financier and convicted sex offender. However, experts warn that this request is unlikely to yield any significant new information, and may be nothing more than a stall tactic to take the heat off the President.

    The Department of Justice’s request to unseal the transcripts, which relate to Epstein and his former girlfriend Ghislaine Maxwell, has been met with skepticism by legal experts. They point out that the transcripts are likely to be heavily redacted and will only reveal a narrow slice of the evidence gathered by investigators.

    “The President is trying to present himself as if he’s doing something here, and it really is nothing,” said one expert. “Southern District prosecutors only present just enough to a grand jury to get an indictment, but it’s not going to be everything the FBI and investigators have figured out about Maxwell and Epstein.”

    The public has been clamoring for the release of the entire FBI file on Epstein, which is believed to contain thousands of pages of information and hundreds of hours of video footage. However, this request is unlikely to be granted, as it may implicate Trump and other high-profile individuals who have been linked to Epstein.

    In fact, experts predict that the judges who presided over the Epstein and Maxwell cases will reject the government’s request to unseal the transcripts. “In Manhattan, federal prosecutors are trying to get a particular result, so they present the case very narrowly and inform the grand jury what they want them to do,” said Krissoff, a legal expert. “That’s what we’re going to see – a carefully curated selection of evidence that doesn’t reveal the full extent of Epstein’s crimes or his connections to powerful people.”

    The move to unseal the transcripts has been seen as a transparent attempt by Trump to distance himself from the Epstein Files. However, it is unlikely to satisfy the public’s appetite for answers, and may ultimately backfire as a PR stunt.

    As one expert noted, “People want the entire file, from however long. That’s just not what this is. They basically spoon-feed the indictment to the grand jury. That’s what we’re going to see.” The American public will have to wait and see if the transcripts are ultimately unsealed, but for now, it seems that Trump’s move is nothing more than a clever distraction from the real issues at hand.

  • Rep. Elise Stefanik Under Fire for Celebrating Cuts to Public Radio in Her Own District

    Rep. Elise Stefanik, a Republican from New York, is facing backlash for her enthusiastic response to the defunding of public radio stations, including the local affiliate in her own district. On Saturday, Stefanik took to social media to celebrate the cuts, saying “Goodbye NPR and NCPR!” – a move that has been widely criticized as callous and out of touch with the needs of her constituents.

    NCPR, the local public radio affiliate in Stefanik’s district, provides essential news and community updates to rural areas of New York, where access to other news sources is limited. The cuts to public radio funding will likely have a significant impact on these communities, which rely heavily on NCPR for information and connection to the wider world.

    Stefanik’s celebration of the cuts has been seen as particularly egregious, given the potential harm they will cause to her own constituents. A reporter noted that the congresswoman seems to be “taking pleasure in the pain these cuts will cause in her own district” and that her comments are “disturbing, to say the least.”

    The cuts to public radio funding are expected to result in job losses and reduced services, which will have a ripple effect on local economies. Rural stations like NCPR employ people who are integral to their communities, shopping at local businesses, sending their kids to local schools, and caring about the future of their towns and villages.

    Critics have accused Stefanik of lying and misrepresenting the work of NCPR, and of being out of touch with the needs and concerns of her constituents. “It is extremely concerning that at a time when so many people across rural America are struggling to make ends meet, she would be celebrating the almost certain job losses that will be a result of these cuts,” said one commentator.

    Stefanik’s actions have been seen as a betrayal of the trust placed in her by her constituents, who expect their elected representatives to work in their best interests. Instead, it appears that Stefanik is more interested in scoring political points than in serving the needs of her community.

  • Fox News Hit with Another Defamation Lawsuit for Spreading Lies on Air

    In the latest blow to the network’s credibility, Fox News is facing a new defamation lawsuit filed by California Governor Gavin Newsom, who accuses the network of intentionally misrepresenting a phone call he had with former President Donald Trump. The lawsuit, which seeks $787 million in damages, marks the latest in a string of high-profile defamation cases against Fox News.

    At the center of the controversy is a false claim made by Trump on June 10, in which he stated that he had spoken to Newsom “a day ago” about deploying National Guard troops and Marines to Los Angeles in response to protests against Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents. However, Newsom quickly denied having spoken to Trump as recently as the former President claimed.

    In an attempt to bolster his claim, Trump provided a screenshot of a call log between him and Newsom to Fox News’ John Roberts. But the image ultimately corroborated Newsom’s account, showing that the two had spoken on June 7 – not June 9, as Trump had claimed. The call had lasted for approximately 16 minutes.

    Despite the evidence contradicting Trump’s claim, Fox News host Jesse Watters continued to spread the false narrative on his program, accusing Newsom of lying about the conversation. This deliberate attempt to cover for Trump’s distortion has now led to the defamation lawsuit against Fox News and Watters.

    The $787 million figure sought in damages is symbolic, mirroring the amount Fox News paid to Dominion Voting Systems in 2023 for spreading lies about the 2020 presidential election. The lawsuit highlights the network’s pattern of prioritizing partisan loyalty over factual accuracy, and raises questions about the consequences of spreading misinformation on a national platform.

  • President Trump’s Claim About Uncle and Unabomber Debunked: Experts Question Decline in Cognitive Ability

    In a series of recent statements, President Donald Trump has repeatedly made claims about his uncle, John Trump, a professor at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). One of the most notable assertions made by Trump is that his uncle taught Ted Kaczynski, also known as the Unabomber, a domestic terrorist who carried out a series of bombings that killed three people and injured 23 others.

    However, fact-checkers and experts have thoroughly debunked this claim, raising questions about the former President’s credibility and mental acuity. According to MIT records, John Trump was indeed a professor at the institution, but there is no evidence to suggest that he ever taught Ted Kaczynski.

    Kaczynski, who carried out his bombing campaign between 1978 and 1995, was a student at Harvard University, not MIT. He graduated from Harvard in 1962 and went on to earn his Ph.D. in mathematics from the University of Michigan in 1967.

    Timeline Conflict: John Trump died in 1985. Kaczynski was identified as the Unabomber by the FBI in 1996, and his bombing campaign occurred between 1978 and 1995,This makes it impossible for John Trump to have known Kaczynski was the Unabomber or to have discussed Kaczynski’s studies with Donald Trump after Kaczynski’s identity became known

    “This claim has been thoroughly debunked, and it’s surprising that the former President continues to repeat it,” said Professor Peter Donaldson, a historian at MIT. “John Trump was a respected professor at MIT, but there is no record of him teaching Ted Kaczynski. It’s possible that Trump is misremembering or exaggerating his uncle’s connections.”

    The debunking of Trump’s claim has led some experts to question his mental state and ability to recall facts accurately. “This is not the first time that Trump has made false or misleading claims, and it’s concerning that he continues to do so,” said Dr. Philip Zimbardo, a psychologist at Stanford University. “While it’s impossible to diagnose someone without a thorough evaluation, Trump’s behavior suggests a possible decline in cognitive function or a willingness to manipulate facts for his own purposes.”

    Trump’s repeated claims about his uncle and the Unabomber have also sparked debate about the former President’s honesty and trustworthiness. “This is a classic example of Trump’s tendency to embellish or invent facts to suit his own narrative,” said Professor Kathleen Hall Jamieson, a communications expert at the University of Pennsylvania. “It’s essential for the public to be aware of these distortions and to fact-check information carefully to avoid spreading misinformation.”

    As the debate surrounding Trump’s claims continues, one thing is clear: the President’s assertion about his uncle and the Unabomber is entirely without merit.

  • Elise Stefanik’s Vote to Defund NPR: A Threat to Unbiased Journalism and a Revealing Display of Petty Politics

    In a recent vote, Congresswoman Elise Stefanik, Chairwoman of House Republican Leadership, voted for the rescissions package aimed at cutting $9 billion in unobligated spending, including defunding NPR. This move has sparked concern among constituents and journalism advocates, particularly in Stefanik’s 21st Congressional District, where North Country Public Radio serves as the only local independent news source.

    Stefanik’s decision to vote in favor of defunding NPR raises questions about her motivations and commitment to unbiased journalism. North Country Public Radio, based at St. Lawrence University in Canton, New York, provides news and entertainment to the Adirondack region, as well as parts of Vermont, Ontario, and Quebec. As the local NPR station, it offers a vital service to the community, providing a platform for diverse voices and perspectives.

    However, it appears that Stefanik’s desire to defund NPR may be driven by personal interests rather than a genuine concern for fiscal responsibility. A long-standing grudge against a former employee of North Country Public Radio seems to be a significant factor in her decision. According to reports, a former staffer sent an inappropriately political email, which was quickly addressed by the station. Despite this, Stefanik has chosen to hold the entire network accountable for the actions of one individual, demonstrating a petty and vindictive approach to politics.

    Furthermore, Stefanik’s stance on NPR defunding is starkly at odds with her defense of former President Donald Trump’s administration, which was found to have routinely ignored the Hatch Act, a federal law prohibiting partisan political activities by executive branch employees. While Stefanik advocates for a zero-tolerance policy on political activity by public radio employees, she has fiercely defended Trump’s administration, despite evidence of widespread Hatch Act violations.

    The defunding of NPR would not only harm the network but also undermine the very fabric of democracy. Independent journalism is essential to a healthy and functioning society, providing a platform for diverse voices, holding those in power accountable, and fostering informed civic engagement. By voting to defund NPR, Stefanik is, in effect, silencing a critical voice that serves her constituents and the broader public interest.

    As the people of New York consider Stefanik’s (possible) candidacy for Governor, they must ask themselves: Do we want a leader who prioritizes petty politics over principle, and who seeks to undermine the independence of our public media? The answer, quite clearly, is no. We deserve better than a leader who would seek to silence unbiased voices and compromise the integrity of our democratic institutions.

  • Senate Democrats Must Use Every Tool to Stop the Appointment of Emil Bove

    The appointment of Emil Bove to a federal judgeship is a threat to the independence and impartiality of the federal judiciary, and Senate Democrats must use every tool at their disposal to stop it. Bove, a former personal defense attorney for Donald Trump, has a history of putting loyalty to the former president above the Constitution, the law, and the nation’s core principles.

    Bove’s nomination is a reward for his loyalty to Trump and his willingness to advance the authoritarian agenda of the previous administration. His actions as a federal prosecutor in Manhattan and as a lawyer for Trump demonstrate a pattern of disregard for the rule of law and a willingness to subvert it to achieve his goals. A former Department of Justice attorney revealed that Bove planned to “resist court orders” that would block the Trump administration’s “illegal efforts” to deport individuals, using tactics such as “deliberate delay” and “disinformation.”

    Furthermore, Bove’s leadership style and behavior have been called into question. An internal inquiry into his management of the terrorism and international narcotics unit found that he had an “abusive” management style and temper, leading to a recommendation that he be demoted. Additionally, a group of defense attorneys and prosecutors who worked with him accused him of using questionable tactics while litigating cases.

    Bove’s pattern of discrimination and hostility towards Black and brown communities is also a concern. He has called for the elimination of programs and policies related to “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility,” claiming they “undermine our national unity.” This kind of rhetoric is not befitting of a federal judge, who is supposed to uphold the law and protect the rights of all individuals, regardless of their background or identity.

    Perhaps most strikingly, Bove has consistently worked to protect powerful figures facing serious allegations. In one notable instance, he sent a memo directing the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York to dismiss the prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams, who had been charged with abusing his elected positions to solicit bribes and illegal campaign contributions.

    Given Bove’s disturbing record, it is imperative that Senate Democrats use every tool in the toolbox to stop his appointment. This includes filibustering his nomination, demanding thorough investigations into his past actions and behavior, and highlighting the dangers of confirming someone with such a problematic record to a federal judgeship.

    In the past, Republicans have used similar tactics to block Democratic judicial appointments, and it is time for Democrats to find the courage to do the same. The independence and impartiality of the federal judiciary are at stake, and confirming Bove would be a betrayal of the values of justice and equality that our country is supposed to uphold.